Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Offline map test on Apple Watch Ultra for hiking

jooonas.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 108 posts

Re: Offline map test on Apple Watch Ultra for hiking

#41

Post by r0fl »

AmericanChopper wrote: post #20
greggsy wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure they’re 5-10 years behind, but I wouldn’t underestimate Apple’s ability to create a thriving ecosystem. Any Garmin app developers worth their salt should be scrambling to port their existing apps to the Apple Watch platform. It’s currently an under-supplied market, and failing to tap into that opportunity is a bad business strategy. Totally agree re: the current state of repairability and support, but I wouldn’t…

> Totally agree re: the current state of repairability and support Is the target market really concerned about this? I’ll chew through a $200-300 pair of shoes in 4-6 weeks, and I’m more-or-less a casual runner. The cost of attending events is much more than that. I probably would buy a Garmin if I was really taking things seriously, but the Apple Watch does what I need, and even if I brought a brand new one every ye…

Top result on Google for how many km should running shoes last

Experts recommend you replace your running shoes every 500 to 750 kilometers. That's roughly every 300 to 500 miles, which equates to approximately four to six months for someone who runs 20 miles a week.

What are you doing replacing your shoes every 4 weeks?

Re: Offline map test on Apple Watch Ultra for hiking

#42

Post by jojule »

kobieyc wrote: post #29
seanp2k2 wrote: post #27

Fenix 5 owner here who recently upgraded to the Ultra. For daily stuff and "normal" workouts, it's way more useful. I get alerts from my cameras with useable images when they detect faces around our house, for example. I can do useful things like watch my grill temp + probe temp from the watch. The face customization experience is a LOT better than the Fenix. It feels like an entirely different class of device with t…

Sounds like you're getting all the benefits of a regular apple watch with cellular, no need for the Ultra

Ultra has almost the double physical battery and may have some exclusive optimization to GPS and HR that may not come to other watches when released later this year.

Re: Offline map test on Apple Watch Ultra for hiking

#43

Post by ghaff »

enlyth wrote: post #10
exabrial wrote: post #6

Just buy a Garmin if you want to do anything -useful- with your watch for sports or outdoors. Apple is 5-10 years behind their reliability or battery life. And if you’re going somewhere without a cell signal… or god forbid, you don’t have (shudder) wifi, it’ll tick right along. Not to mention they don’t sunset their products after 12 months… your watch will get updates for a long time. They’re also -very- repairable…

I just find it weird that in their reveal event they portrayed all these people doing extreme sports in the middle of nowhere, climbing some huge mountain with the watch, and then you find out it has a battery life of 36 hours at most. You're supposed to carry a power bank to your climbing expedition and charge your watch constantly? How impractical is that.

Well, if you're climbing some huge mountain in the middle of nowhere you probably need to charge your Garmin as well.

Garmin absolutely has better battery life. But if you can see your way to charging the Apple Watch more frequently it seems more interesting for a combination of regular smartwatch use and day activities. And, if you are climbing huge mountains in the middle of nowhere, I assume purchasing a specialized watch if you want one is the least of your expenses. (Or something like an InReach.)

Re: Offline map test on Apple Watch Ultra for hiking

#44

Post by ak217 »

AmericanChopper wrote: post #20
greggsy wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure they’re 5-10 years behind, but I wouldn’t underestimate Apple’s ability to create a thriving ecosystem. Any Garmin app developers worth their salt should be scrambling to port their existing apps to the Apple Watch platform. It’s currently an under-supplied market, and failing to tap into that opportunity is a bad business strategy. Totally agree re: the current state of repairability and support, but I wouldn’t…

> Totally agree re: the current state of repairability and support Is the target market really concerned about this? I’ll chew through a $200-300 pair of shoes in 4-6 weeks, and I’m more-or-less a casual runner. The cost of attending events is much more than that. I probably would buy a Garmin if I was really taking things seriously, but the Apple Watch does what I need, and even if I brought a brand new one every ye…

What's your weekly mileage? Are you doing something extreme to your shoes? Most runners don't spend, nor could they afford to spend $250 per pair of shoes that wear out in 6 weeks. Try $100 every 6 months instead. Events do add up but for most runners it comes out to roughly the same as the shoes or less. Running is popular because it's affordable. You might be projecting your rarefied well funded lifestyle onto the rest of the market

Re: Offline map test on Apple Watch Ultra for hiking

#45

Post by ghaff »

WirelessGigabit wrote: post #36
majou wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not to mention they don’t sunset their products after 12 months Apple still provides security updates for the iPhone 5s from 2013. https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT213428

Doesn’t matter. Your applications could choose not to include certain iOS versions anymore. And then you’re SOL, even if you’ve paid for the app but now the online component doesn’t work because they changed their APIs.

What's your suggested alternative for a 2013 device?

Re: Offline map test on Apple Watch Ultra for hiking

#46

Post by randomfool »

seanp2k2 wrote: post #27

Fenix 5 owner here who recently upgraded to the Ultra. For daily stuff and "normal" workouts, it's way more useful. I get alerts from my cameras with useable images when they detect faces around our house, for example. I can do useful things like watch my grill temp + probe temp from the watch. The face customization experience is a LOT better than the Fenix. It feels like an entirely different class of device with t…

Not using your Garmin for hiking is very surprising.

Primary reason is that tracking position for the duration drains battery where Garmin can do 50hrs of it. This gives me a .gpx file of the route for future reference and passing to friends.

Second is that while tracking it's 10x easier to check current distance and elevation on a watch vs phone. I head out with a list of mileage for every notable waypoint (water, turns, elevation of passes, etc). I'm constantly checking this and only if I'm questioning my route do I pull out my phone.

Weight: Fenix is heavy- 945 is better, Coros Pace 2 even better.

Re: Offline map test on Apple Watch Ultra for hiking

#47

Post by macintux »

WirelessGigabit wrote: post #36
majou wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not to mention they don’t sunset their products after 12 months Apple still provides security updates for the iPhone 5s from 2013. https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT213428

Doesn’t matter. Your applications could choose not to include certain iOS versions anymore. And then you’re SOL, even if you’ve paid for the app but now the online component doesn’t work because they changed their APIs.

That risk exists for all electronics. The point remains: 12 months is not an accurate assessment of how long you can expect software upgrades.

Re: Offline map test on Apple Watch Ultra for hiking

#48

Post by AmericanChopper »

r0fl wrote: post #41
AmericanChopper wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Totally agree re: the current state of repairability and support Is the target market really concerned about this? I’ll chew through a $200-300 pair of shoes in 4-6 weeks, and I’m more-or-less a casual runner. The cost of attending events is much more than that. I probably would buy a Garmin if I was really taking things seriously, but the Apple Watch does what I need, and even if I brought a brand new one every ye…

Top result on Google for how many km should running shoes last Experts recommend you replace your running shoes every 500 to 750 kilometers. That's roughly every 300 to 500 miles, which equates to approximately four to six months for someone who runs 20 miles a week. What are you doing replacing your shoes every 4 weeks?

I typically get around 400-600 kms out of a fresh pair of running shoes before the tread is completely gone and the energy return structure stops returning energy. I typically run about 100km/week. A bit less if I’m tapering, or injured (not very often), or on holiday. I also walk a lot, which I have different shoes for, but that adds an extra few pairs to the annual shoes bill as well.

Edit: I probably go through shoes slightly faster than most runners, because I weigh a bit more than most runners. But I don’t think that’s a huge factor.

Re: Offline map test on Apple Watch Ultra for hiking

#49

Post by ghaff »

randomfool wrote: post #46
seanp2k2 wrote: post #27

Fenix 5 owner here who recently upgraded to the Ultra. For daily stuff and "normal" workouts, it's way more useful. I get alerts from my cameras with useable images when they detect faces around our house, for example. I can do useful things like watch my grill temp + probe temp from the watch. The face customization experience is a LOT better than the Fenix. It feels like an entirely different class of device with t…

Not using your Garmin for hiking is very surprising. Primary reason is that tracking position for the duration drains battery where Garmin can do 50hrs of it. This gives me a .gpx file of the route for future reference and passing to friends. Second is that while tracking it's 10x easier to check current distance and elevation on a watch vs phone. I head out with a list of mileage for every notable waypoint (water, t…

Maybe I got a lemon but after taking way too long to conclude this was the case, the Fenix 5 just never gave me correct distances and I gave up on using it. Tried all the usual setting changes.

For a day hike, my Apple Watch 3 is adequate but battery life is a bit marginal. I assume the Ultra will be sufficiently better that day hikes (which is mostly what I do) will be fine.

Re: Offline map test on Apple Watch Ultra for hiking

#50

Post by prescriptivist »

MrMetlHed wrote: post #40
qualifiedai wrote: post #8

I love my Garmin Fenix 7 watch. Built in surf session tracking is superb. Lots of other cool features, solar charging and over a week of battery for my use. I ditched my Apple watch for it. Having said that, one dangerous area where Garmin is missing a boat is their Garmin IQ store - that ecosystem is basically dead with very few useful apps.

Yeah, this is my only complaint about my Fenix 6. Total lack of any kind of app ecosystem. I don't even know how they'd manage to create one without some sort of open standard for delivering richer notifications to watches or something. It's a bummer.

Doesn't help that you have to write apps in their proprietary language.
Post reply on HN